Sample size a bit teensy (515) and single-constituency polling is easy to screw up, but FWIW: Lab 35% (+5 on 2010), UKIP 30% (+24) Con 28% (-20) Liberal Democrats 5% (-10).
515 is a good enough sample size for a constituency poll. Ok, it means that any of the 3 parties could be in the lead but it makes Mike seem prescient with his vote UKIP to stop Labour argument. Was the poll before or after sitting MP stood down (and did she know about it)? If after maybe they are still looking at Thanet South anyway (in my opinion they should but if they dont make the decision either way soon).
Is Con really likely to be -20 in any individual constituency at GE 2015?
Even today they are only -5 on average in polls.
Of course some constituencies will vary from the mean but even if they were -5 on average on the day (which would mean a large defeat in any case) is it really likely they could be -20 in any one seat?
"The polling also shows a substantial disagreement with the Tory claim that a vote for Ukip will allow Ed Miliband into Downing Street. Evidencing that, 52% of Ukip voters said they would stick with their preferred party rather than the Conservatives even if that meant Miliband became prime minister, while 27% said they "would rather stop Ed Miliband from becoming prime minister, even if that means I had to vote Conservative rather than Ukip". Just over a fifth were don't-knows."
Poor Dave
No, poor Britain.
Anyone who votes Labour or UKIP may have to accept that they put Miliband into No 10. It won't be an easy thing to accept, by around 2016 - especially for UKIPers, assuming they actually want to leave the EU.
"Almost of 78% of Ukip voters in Thanet South said they would not vote Conservative even if their preferred party did not field a candidate. That will reinforce theories that voters cannot easily be won over from Ukip by any amount of Conservative messaging. If Ukip did not stand in the constituency, 41% said they would not vote, 22% said they would vote Conservative, 19% Labour, 4% for other parties and 13% did not know. On those figures, Labour would still win the seat."
FWIW I think this even overstes the potential for the rest of us to get UKIP votes (given that they will in fact stand everywhere). UKIP voters are largely lost to the main parties this time round. They mostly aren't in it for the purpose of carefully selecting a government, but for saying "get stuffed, big parties".
Was the poll before or after sitting MP stood down (and did she know about it)? If after maybe they are still looking at Thanet South anyway (in my opinion they should but if they dont make the decision either way soon).
It says conducted 19th to 25th, commissioned by a UKIP donor. She announced that she'd stand down "for personal reasons" on the evening of the 25th, having still been still earnestly tweeting about local sheds that same afternoon. Maybe the UKIPper tipped her or her association off about the poll and that's what made her quit?
"Almost of 78% of Ukip voters in Thanet South said they would not vote Conservative even if their preferred party did not field a candidate. That will reinforce theories that voters cannot easily be won over from Ukip by any amount of Conservative messaging. If Ukip did not stand in the constituency, 41% said they would not vote, 22% said they would vote Conservative, 19% Labour, 4% for other parties and 13% did not know. On those figures, Labour would still win the seat."
FWIW I think this even overstes the potential for the rest of us to get UKIP votes (given that they will in fact stand everywhere). UKIP voters are largely lost to the main parties this time round. They mostly aren't in it for the purpose of carefully selecting a government, but for saying "get stuffed, big parties".
Is Con really likely to be -20 in any individual constituency at GE 2015?
Even today they are only -5 on average in polls.
Of course some constituencies will vary from the mean but even if they were -5 on average on the day (which would mean a large defeat in any case) is it really likely they could be -20 in any one seat?
Seems way, way, way off beam.
It's near enough the local election results there to be plausible.
Replacing Dave won't be greeted with much weeping and wailing
It will after a year or so.
Hell, even Gordon Brown will look good in retrospect, compared with Ed.
With the one exception of Michael Foot - who was at least honourable - he's the least suitable to be PM of any leader of either of the main parties for well over half a century.
Alan Brown, a Ukip donor who commissioned the poll, said: "Lord Ashcroft's interesting polls have been interpreted by many as showing that a vote for Ukip was not only a wasted vote but also a counterproductive one as it could put Miliband into No 10, supposedly against the wishes of most Ukip voters. This has since become the standard media narrative where Ukip is discussed, and a regular Conservative party attack line.
"I did not share this view and was sure that Ukip's increasing popularity and support meant that the picture was much more complicated. I believed that we were taking significant numbers of votes from Labour and the Liberal Democrats as well as the Tories. I also believed that Ukip's popularity and recent phenomenal growth meant that in our strongest areas our support was likely to be significantly higher than Ashcroft's figure of 10-14% nationally would suggest.
"In addition I felt that the fact that Ukip has generally in the past not been [mentioned] in these opinion poll questions may have further underestimated our support."
Come on Ashcroft, are you going to just sit there and take that? Or are you going to COMMISSION SOME MORE POLLS?
EdinTokyo Schweitzer has about as much chance of becoming president in 2016 as I have. Obama only won in 2008 because the country was desperate for change after 8 years of Bush and a youthful charismatic leader, and Hillary still arguably beat him in the popular vote. In 2016 Hillary will be even more experienced and in effect the Democrats' best real hope of keeping the White House after 8 years. In many ways she is the Dems Nixon, a very , ruthless but charmless character who lost narrowly to a charismatic opponent only to come back and finally win eight years later.
FWIW I think this even overstes the potential for the rest of us to get UKIP votes (given that they will in fact stand everywhere). UKIP voters are largely lost to the main parties this time round. They mostly aren't in it for the purpose of carefully selecting a government, but for saying "get stuffed, big parties".
Nick - are UKIP ahead in Broxtowe?!
I don't think so! But the UKIP voters who I meet are (like many Green voters, incidentally), generally uninterested in considering voting for anyone else. We always ask who they'd vote for if UKIP didn't stand, and the answer is nearly always "nobody". I expect them to get somewhere around 7-10%.
Curiously, we do come across people who voted UKIP in 2010 and are now looking elsewhere. It's as if they'd got it out of their system.
Richard Navabi - Hague? Kinnock? IDS? I would also rate them worse than Ed.
Until a few months ago I would have done too, but after Syria and the energy gimmick there can now be no doubt. In both cases he showed a quite extraordinary combination of irresponsibility, ruthlessness and naivety. I'm not sure whether it would be worse if he knew what he was doing, or didn't know what he was doing in each case, but the practical effect is much the same.
And it's part of a pattern. He seems to dither for a long time, then suddenly decide that he must make a strong gesture when some short-term opportunity presents itself. We've seen it with Falkirk and the union link as well.
Even all that wouldn't be so bad, but he also combines this with a bizarre Fabian Society theorising which he actually seems to sincere about. Of course we all laughed at 'Predators vs Producers', and rightly so - but it looks as though he actually believes this stuff, and, worse still, will suddenly and randomly actually try to implement it.
It certainly won't end well, that is for sure.
Of course, anything I say will be dismissed as partisan - but just look at the lack of support he gets from his colleagues. It ain't just me.
On the Thanet South poll, I think Survation would be reasonably ethical about this kind of thing, but it would be interesting to see the whole poll, what with somebody with an obvious agenda paying the piper.
If any other incumbent MPs are ever in a situation like this, you probably want to wait until the detailed tables are published and check the discussion here before you announce your retirement from politics...
Until a few months ago I would have done too, but after Syria... I'm not sure whether it would be worse if he knew what he was doing, or didn't know what he was doing in each case, but the practical effect is much the same.
At least his @RichardNabavi has read his Sallust. His predictions about a future Labour government are beginning to read like the Catiline and Jugurthine Wars.
Richard Navabi He has taken the Labour Party from its second lowest score in a century to a total where they are now polling enough to form a majority government. Yes, he looks like a politics lecturer at a middle rank university and is ruthlessly willing to dispatch even his own brother to advance his cause, but nonetheless he cannot be dismissed!
Richard Navabi He has taken the Labour Party from its second lowest score in a century to a total where they are now polling enough to form a majority government. Yes, he looks like a politics lecturer at a middle rank university and is ruthless willing to dispatch even his own brother to advance his cause, but nonetheless he cannot be dismissed!
I'm not dismissing him - quite the reverse. There's a good market for snake-oil.
Indeed, I was one of those who most strongly argued he shouldn't be underestimated when Labour supporters were in despair in 2011. I was urging people to bet on Labour at the time, when Henry G and others were saying he'd have to go.
tim and Neil. Thanks for pointing me to the South Thanet betting markets.
I haven't had a bet but you'd have to think the Tories are too short at 4/6. Labour are probably the value at 7/2 and I see from Mike's earlier piece they were 4/1.
Can't remember if this question has been asked, but how many UKIP VI's didn't vote last time? Or the time before?
After all, there's quite a big proportion of the electorate in many seats which doesn't vote, for whatever reason. Thanet S had around 35% at the elections this century.
But Mike L. If Farage stands in Thanet South it becomes atypical. I don't think you can apply national trends or polls to an individual constituency when you get a "rogue" event such as this.
Richard Navabi He has taken the Labour Party from its second lowest score in a century to a total where they are now polling enough to form a majority government. Yes, he looks like a politics lecturer at a middle rank university and is ruthlessly willing to dispatch even his own brother to advance his cause, but nonetheless he cannot be dismissed!
But but but - the Lib Dems are in government, and therefore aren't picking up anti-government protest votes. And the Conservative vote share is, to an extent, being split by UKIP. Given those circumstances, Miliband would be doing disastrously if he hadn't got Labour to a polling performance which would be enough to form a majority government.
But Mike L. If Farage stands in Thanet South it becomes atypical. I don't think you can apply national trends or polls to an individual constituency when you get a "rogue" event such as this.
100% obviously overstates it, but you'd need unprecedentedly good targeting by UKIP and tactical voting by right-wingers to keep the Con losses down while getting the UKIP score high enough to take the seat.
But Mike L. If Farage stands in Thanet South it becomes atypical. I don't think you can apply national trends or polls to an individual constituency when you get a "rogue" event such as this.
100% obviously overstates it, but you'd need unprecedentedly good targeting by UKIP and tactical voting by right-wingers to keep the Con losses down while getting the UKIP score high enough to take the seat.
The Green party took a seat at the last GE with no real impact on overall national voteshare. So unprecedented levels of targeting for UKIP but not unprecedented levels of targeting.
Not bad, but as a Mum of three teenage lads I have seen worse when it comes to trainers, t-shirts or even shorts. Son No2 has a mate who would really give you a run for your money in the style stakes.
All this talk of the UK being the home of the fascist movement, makes me want to join the EDL, for a mixture to find out what I'm missing and for the comedy value of someone like me joining the EDL.
When I was in America, I wanted to join the Ku Klux Klan, mostly to find out what soap powder they use, to get their clothes so brilliantly white.
There's little point wearing a white hood, TSE, when everyone will recognise you from your shoes.
I'm never living down those shoes am I?
Jeez, can't we have a pic of these trainers/shoes/whatever? They can't be as bad as I'm imagining*. Plus a pic of Neil's favourite cocktail.
*they can't be as bad as my x18 trainers with spikey soles.
The Green party took a seat at the last GE with no real impact on overall national voteshare. So unprecedented levels of targeting for UKIP but not unprecedented levels of targeting.
Brighton Pavilion GE 2010: Lab -7.5%
Whole of UK GE 2010: Lab -6.2%
So Lab underperformance in Brighton Pavilion = 1.3%
Thanet South GE 2010: Con 48.0%
2015 GE: assume whole of UK Con -5%, ie in line with today's opinion polls
With 1.3% underperformance that's -6.3% in Thanet South which gives 41.7% which will win by miles. If it's even a moderately tight 3 way (ie Con, Lab and UKIP) then even 35% will win (***) - ie can afford underperformance of at least 8% which is huge (and that assumes national result same as today's polls).
(***) Say 35/34/24/5/2 at worst. If 3rd place beats 24 then less than 35 wins.
The Green party took a seat at the last GE with no real impact on overall national voteshare. So unprecedented levels of targeting for UKIP but not unprecedented levels of targeting.
Brighton Pavilion GE 2010: Lab -7.5%
Whole of UK GE 2010: Lab -6.2%
So Lab underperformance in Brighton Pavilion = 1.3%
Thanet South GE 2010: Con 48.0%
2015 GE: assume whole of UK Con -5%, ie in line with today's opinion polls
With 1.3% underperformance that's -6.3% in Thanet South which gives 41.7% which will win by miles. If it's even a moderately tight 3 way (ie Con, Lab and UKIP) then even 35% will win (***) - ie can afford underperformance of at least 8% which is huge (and that assumes national result same as today's polls).
(***) Say 35/34/24/5/2 at worst. If 3rd place beats 24 then less than 35 wins.
There have been bigger swings before in Thanet S. but it's unusual for the Tories to drop much below 40%. In 2005 Lab won with just over 40% and a majority of 664.
"The polling also shows a substantial disagreement with the Tory claim that a vote for Ukip will allow Ed Miliband into Downing Street. Evidencing that, 52% of Ukip voters said they would stick with their preferred party rather than the Conservatives even if that meant Miliband became prime minister, while 27% said they "would rather stop Ed Miliband from becoming prime minister, even if that means I had to vote Conservative rather than Ukip". Just over a fifth were don't-knows."
Poor Dave
No, poor Britain.
Anyone who votes Labour or UKIP may have to accept that they put Miliband into No 10. It won't be an easy thing to accept, by around 2016 - especially for UKIPers, assuming they actually want to leave the EU.
Anyone who didn't support AV, or who supported the Tory rebels against the Lords reform, had to accept that they put Miliband into Number Ten.
Comments
Lab 35% (+5 on 2010),
UKIP 30% (+24)
Con 28% (-20)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-10).
Schweitzer could win Montana for the Dems!
515 is a good enough sample size for a constituency poll. Ok, it means that any of the 3 parties could be in the lead but it makes Mike seem prescient with his vote UKIP to stop Labour argument. Was the poll before or after sitting MP stood down (and did she know about it)? If after maybe they are still looking at Thanet South anyway (in my opinion they should but if they dont make the decision either way soon).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/alancochrane/10477085/For-a-man-who-wants-to-be-independent-Salmond-wants-to-depend-on-the-English.html
Even today they are only -5 on average in polls.
Of course some constituencies will vary from the mean but even if they were -5 on average on the day (which would mean a large defeat in any case) is it really likely they could be -20 in any one seat?
Seems way, way, way off beam.
Anyone who votes Labour or UKIP may have to accept that they put Miliband into No 10. It won't be an easy thing to accept, by around 2016 - especially for UKIPers, assuming they actually want to leave the EU.
"Almost of 78% of Ukip voters in Thanet South said they would not vote Conservative even if their preferred party did not field a candidate. That will reinforce theories that voters cannot easily be won over from Ukip by any amount of Conservative messaging. If Ukip did not stand in the constituency, 41% said they would not vote, 22% said they would vote Conservative, 19% Labour, 4% for other parties and 13% did not know. On those figures, Labour would still win the seat."
FWIW I think this even overstes the potential for the rest of us to get UKIP votes (given that they will in fact stand everywhere). UKIP voters are largely lost to the main parties this time round. They mostly aren't in it for the purpose of carefully selecting a government, but for saying "get stuffed, big parties".
Fascinating timing!
Hell, even Gordon Brown will look good in retrospect, compared with Ed.
With the one exception of Michael Foot - who was at least honourable - he's the least suitable to be PM of any leader of either of the main parties for well over half a century.
OK, I'll put the question another way:
Has either major Party (ie Con or Lab) done 15 points better or worse than their average vote % change in any constituency in any recent GE?
Your lack of praise - ever - for Miliband is very striking.
Curiously, we do come across people who voted UKIP in 2010 and are now looking elsewhere. It's as if they'd got it out of their system.
And it's part of a pattern. He seems to dither for a long time, then suddenly decide that he must make a strong gesture when some short-term opportunity presents itself. We've seen it with Falkirk and the union link as well.
Even all that wouldn't be so bad, but he also combines this with a bizarre Fabian Society theorising which he actually seems to sincere about. Of course we all laughed at 'Predators vs Producers', and rightly so - but it looks as though he actually believes this stuff, and, worse still, will suddenly and randomly actually try to implement it.
It certainly won't end well, that is for sure.
Of course, anything I say will be dismissed as partisan - but just look at the lack of support he gets from his colleagues. It ain't just me.
If any other incumbent MPs are ever in a situation like this, you probably want to wait until the detailed tables are published and check the discussion here before you announce your retirement from politics...
She would be crazy to retire based on this poll - if Con lose Thanet South they are surely going to lose at least 75 seats.
On any respectable performance (ie lose popular vote by less than 5%) then Con will hold it.
Indeed, I was one of those who most strongly argued he shouldn't be underestimated when Labour supporters were in despair in 2011. I was urging people to bet on Labour at the time, when Henry G and others were saying he'd have to go.
I haven't had a bet but you'd have to think the Tories are too short at 4/6. Labour are probably the value at 7/2 and I see from Mike's earlier piece they were 4/1.
After all, there's quite a big proportion of the electorate in many seats which doesn't vote, for whatever reason. Thanet S had around 35% at the elections this century.
If Con lose Thanet South it is 100% certain there will be a Labour majority - and a large one at that.
If anyone thinks Con are too short at 4/6 for Thanet South then you are much, much better advised to bet on a Lab majority at 6/4 or better.
http://survation.com/2013/11/new-constituency-polling-in-south-thanet/
Whole of UK GE 2010: Lab -6.2%
So Lab underperformance in Brighton Pavilion = 1.3%
Thanet South GE 2010: Con 48.0%
2015 GE: assume whole of UK Con -5%, ie in line with today's opinion polls
With 1.3% underperformance that's -6.3% in Thanet South which gives 41.7% which will win by miles. If it's even a moderately tight 3 way (ie Con, Lab and UKIP) then even 35% will win (***) - ie can afford underperformance of at least 8% which is huge (and that assumes national result same as today's polls).
(***) Say 35/34/24/5/2 at worst. If 3rd place beats 24 then less than 35 wins.